Allahabad High Court
Radhey Shyam vs State Of U.P. on 17 February, 2021
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 30
Case :- BAIL No. - 8372 of 2019
Applicant :- Radhey Shyam
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Farhan Alam Osmany,Manoj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Bajpai
Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
The case is called out.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant, learned counsel for the complainant Sri Ashutosh Bajpai, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State Ms. Nikita Mishra, Advocate are present in the Court.
The present bail-application is moved on behalf of accused-applicant-Radhey Shyam, who is involved in Case Crime No.130 of 2019, under Section 306 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Ramgaon, District Bahraich.
The occasion of present bail-application has arisen on rejection of bail-plea of the accused-applicant by learned Incharge Sessions Judge, Bahraich vide order dated 02.08.2019.
Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have already been exchanged between the parties appearing in the case. As such, the case is riped for hearing.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant submitted that the accused-applicant is falsely implicated only on the basis of suspicion and fictitious story. Reading over the first information report, learned counsel submitted that the incident is reported to have been occurred on the festival of Holi where everyone including the present accused-applicant and the deceased of the incidents were dancing, having been intoxicated in the effect of liquor drunk by them, on the rhythm of D.J. It is stated in the F.I.R. that the present accused-applicant intercepted the deceased, therefore, an incident of fracas bursted between them. The people of the locality interfered them, the deceased went back to his home. The informant-wife of the deceased further stated in the first information report, humiliated from the incident, her husband in fury and shock, left the house and ultimately he was found dead, hanging from a tree. Learned counsel further submitted that initially the case was registered under Section 302 I.P.C. but after investigation, the charge sheet is submitted under Section 306 I.P.C. The bail-application by the Sessions Court is rejected under Section 306 I.P.C.
Learned counsel further submitted that there is no allegations in the F.I.R. by the informant or in the statement of witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that something is done to induce the deceased so as to put him under compulsion of suicide. Learned counsel in support of his argument, drew the attention towards the inquest report done immediately by the Investigating Officer on 22.03.2019, wherein, no bodily or external injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Moreover, the post mortem report has also no mention of any such external mark of injury on the body of the deceased.
Since the case is under Section 306 I.P.C., learned counsel submitted that the statement of witnesses and that of the informant in the first information report have themselves stated about the deceased having taken liquor, dancing alongwith other people at the spot, where D.J. was being blown, in the course of their enjoyment, some fracas occurred and therefore the accused-applicant has no connection with the deceased. Therefore, the present accused-applicant who are not having any enmity with the deceased or his family members nor any criminal antecedents, deserves to be granted bail so that he may be able to face the trial by putting evidences efficaciously in his favour.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the statement of witnesses have reference to the fracas occurred at the spot, from which the deceased was feeling himself humiliated and was under the fury and shock, which resulted to him to commit suicide, therefore, the accused-applicant cannot be said innocent. However, the fact of deceased, being in effect of liquor intoxicated therewith and having no control over his mind and sentiments, is not rebutted.
Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, I, without making any comment as to the merit of the case, the complicity of accused in the offences, his role, have find force in the submission of learned counsel for the bail-applicants to enlarge him on bail.
Let applicant (Radhey Shyam) involved in Case Crime No.130 of 2019, under Section 306 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Ramgaon, District Bahraich be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 17.2.2021
Saurabh
